I am sorry what where we talking about a week ago my attention span is short?....oooooh! Shiny!:D

Cheers Iggy.;-)

It is a hypothetical, so I can understand the meaning you all give to survive. I'm always worthy

>There is much you say that I don't disagree with, or could merely quibble about, but it seems to me it would be very odd if people who called themselves Catholic—especially priests, bishops, and cardinals—believed the Catholic Church to be "a mere human institution."

You would be surprised. Another way to put it is some persons believe it's core truths are mutable and by definition they are not.

>That would mean they had "lost their faith" (or never had any to begin with).

A third choice would be a defective or imperfect faith.

>I don't know if there is any data to go on, but it seems more likely to me that the people who might be thought of as "subversives" consider themselves to be believing Catholics who think the Church leadership has been wrong on certain matters.

It's one thing to disagree with the Pope on the recognition of Israel pr global warming or the prudence of the death penalty or the migrant crisis etc. Those are not moral or theological truths of the Faith. Some Catholics are practically speaking Protestants with Rosary beads. They can be found on the "left" or the "right".

>I do believe there are a disproportionate number of homosexual priests, but if they have done much of anything in an attempt to change Church teaching and be more welcoming to gay Catholics, I certainly am not aware of it.

I am all for welcoming them. Condoning their lifestyle by some symbolic act would not be good.

>From what I can see, since Humanae Vitae the resistance to Church authority has been largely about heterosexuality. And now, the major complaint against Francis seems to be about the divorced and remarried receiving communion.

Yes to both. Who to give communion too is a matter of discipline since for the most part Catholics are trusted to examine their own consciences and make prudent judgements as to when to receive. The Church aids us by formally forbidding it to certain public acts of sin. To not have these bans is like having a town without stop signs and traffic lights. Careful people will slow down and look both ways at each corner to avoid collisions but idiot drivers OTOH......

Advances in NFP helped sell me on it. Ironically it was a pamphlet I read when I was in Navy A School in the South produced by Baptists from which I learned this.

>So it seems to me the major problem within the Church is that there are various factions, all of whom consider themselves to be Catholics, who disagree. I don't see the problem as Catholics in the Church fighting against "anti-Catholic" or "non-Catholic," or "Catholic-in-name-only" infiltrators.

Except there is an objective set of truths you must except. Even Pope Francis has said one should not take communion if one is conscience of mortal sin and he has spoken of divorced/remarried people who have been lead by the Holy Spirit to abstain from Communion till they resolve their marriage problems(that is often ignored by the liberal press or dismissed by "conservative" haters of the Holy Father).

Being Catholic is never boring.

Cheers David.

Now let us be honest here. If you believe the Catholic Church is a mere human institution & you want them to change their ideology to one you find more agreeable . . . .

There is much you say that I don't disagree with, or could merely quibble about, but it seems to me it would be very odd if people who called themselves Catholic—especially priests, bishops, and cardinals—believed the Catholic Church to be "a mere human institution." That would mean they had "lost their faith" (or never had any to begin with). I don't know if there is any data to go on, but it seems more likely to me that the people who might be thought of as "subversives" consider themselves to be believing Catholics who think the Church leadership has been wrong on certain matters.

I do believe there are a disproportionate number of homosexual priests, but if they have done much of anything in an attempt to change Church teaching and be more welcoming to gay Catholics, I certainly am not aware of it. From what I can see, since Humanae Vitae the resistance to Church authority has been largely about heterosexuality. And now, the major complaint against Francis seems to be about the divorced and remarried receiving communion.

So it seems to me the major problem within the Church is that there are various factions, all of whom consider themselves to be Catholics, who disagree. I don't see the problem as Catholics in the Church fighting against "anti-Catholic" or "non-Catholic," or "Catholic-in-name-only" infiltrators.

Thanks JtS. Double up-votes don't register, but I tried.

>The problem with Rob Abney's comment was not just the odd (mis)use of the term anti-Catholic but also the use of the word infiltrate.

For the record I have no problem with that term. The Church has been infiltrated by subversives.

>The problems in the Catholic Church are not a result of "anti-Catholic" outsiders "infiltrating" the Church in order to do damage from within. They are the result of Catholics doing things they ought not do.

I see what you are saying and not to be flippant but I don't think Rob means somewhere some group of LGBT Socialist Unitarians who read Chick Comics where thinking "Hey let's all join the Romanist Church and destroy it from within". But some subversive elements have gotten a foothold.

>Of course, I have no proof, but it seems highly unlikely that a significant number of the priests who abused minors said to themselves as young men, "Well, I'd really like to attack the Catholic Church from the inside, and as a bonus get my hands on young boys, so I will become a child-abusing priest!"

We are on the same page here. But that having been said I do believe some gay right activists may have joined the Priesthood or some gay Priests joined the gay right movement with the purpose of trying to change the moral doctrines within.

Now let us be honest here. If you believe the Catholic Church is a mere human institution & you want them to change their ideology to one you find more agreeable (not you specifically David I am merely being Rhetorical) then this might make sense. I for example have no problem with Moderate and or Liberal Muslims gaining the upper hand in their religion if it means less or no Jihad.
Also as a theologically conservative Pro-Vatican II Catholic I don't much care for the extremist Reactionary pseudo Trad fringe wing of the Church that actually thinks Vatican II is wrong on religious liberty & (get this) thinks Democracy is sinful and wants to bring back near absolute Christian Monarch. Yeh this isn't the 10th century.
But being that I do believe in the divine origin of the Church I am against persons trying to "change" the moral law. I don't believe such an undertaking will in the end succeed (it has failed in the past) but I am a convinced Catholic.

>Also, I think the majority of those superiors who were involved in cover-ups were trying to protect the Church from scandal. I think they were very misguided, and ultimately what they did has backfired, but I think they a
acted out of a (twisted) sense of loyalty.

Agreed great minds thing alike.

>It is of course possible that a few truly deranged individuals entered the priesthood with the conscious intent of having access to vulnerable youths.

Well pederasts (or to use the technical term. Regressed Pedophile same sex offenders) and other abusers will seek out places they can operate with impunity. As the Priesthood becomes less hospitable they will migrate elsewhere.

>But it takes a great deal of time and perseverance to become a priest. It seems unlikely that a significant number of bad-actors in the priesthood or the hierarchy chose that way of life because they were anti-Catholics, or even subversives, and wanted to harm the Church from within.

Well they might see themselves as "reformers" except they want to change what cannot be changed. The Church's moral teaching on sex is fixed and immutable.

>My understanding was that Rob Abney was saying, in effect, "Don't blame the problems of the Church on Catholics. Catholics wouldn't do things like that. Anti-Catholics have infiltrated the Church, and they are to blame."

I very much doubt that was his meaning but I can see how you might misunderstand. With that I hope this clears that up.

Cheers David.

Aquinas doesn't say there is a third factor, but it seems to me that what he writes about acts of existence entails that there is, above form and matter.

I have some deadlines I have to meet, so I can't give in-depth consideration to this problem for some weeks. Thank you for the discussion, and later, F

The problem with Rob Abney's comment was not just the odd (mis)use of the term anti-Catholic but also the use of the word infiltrate. The problems in the Catholic Church are not a result of "anti-Catholic" outsiders "infiltrating" the Church in order to do damage from within. They are the result of Catholics doing things they ought not do. Of course, I have no proof, but it seems highly unlikely that a significant number of the priests who abused minors said to themselves as young men, "Well, I'd really like to attack the Catholic Church from the inside, and as a bonus get my hands on young boys, so I will become a child-abusing priest!" Also, I think the majority of those superiors who were involved in cover-ups were trying to protect the Church from scandal. I think they were very misguided, and ultimately what they did has backfired, but I think they acted out of a (twisted) sense of loyalty.

It is of course possible that a few truly deranged individuals entered the priesthood with the conscious intent of having access to vulnerable youths. But it takes a great deal of time and perseverance to become a priest. It seems unlikely that a significant number of bad-actors in the priesthood or the hierarchy chose that way of life because they were anti-Catholics, or even subversives, and wanted to harm the Church from within.

My understanding was that Rob Abney was saying, in effect, "Don't blame the problems of the Church on Catholics. Catholics wouldn't do things like that. Anti-Catholics have infiltrated the Church, and they are to blame."

Yes, and That is not only my opinion, Pope Benedict predicted it.